* Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:02:50 -0700]: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:31:13PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:25:11 -0700]:
> > > But at a minimum, yes, the audacious-plugins package should be depending > > > on > > > libaudacious by way of shlibdeps. > > There is no NEEDED entry in the plugins against libaudaciousX. > That's a bug in the plugins, isn't it? Don't they refer to symbols from > libaudacious? Well, point. But the package level strict dependency is still needed because you don't want audacious against lib4 and -plugins against lib5 installed at the same time. Given that, I can understand why plugins would not DT_NEED the main library. (Is that a serious bug? I don't think so, after all they're not directly under /usr/lib.) > > (Which, true, solves the situation.) This referred to the "independent migration to testing" situation. Breakage may still occur due to partial upgrades. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Truth is the most valuable thing we have, so let's economize it. -- Mark Twain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]